How do you hold typology?

[Frosty]

Is it an interest that you share deeply with others, or is it something that you are semi-guarded and cautious with? How often is it on your mind, and how often and to what depth are you willing to speak about it.


But anyways, how do you treat your understanding of typology in real life? How do you choose who and when and if to ever share it? Ever gotten someone to take a test, or spur any interest in anyone else? Have you ever wanted to or did you just feel too connected to the understandings that you had arrived at yourself, the 'knowledge' that you had built up. Is typology an individual thing to deal with the masses of daily life, to remove yourself from them and examine them from afar? What is it to you?

I wrote my answer but it got super long and it just wasn't right so I deleted it. Maybe later.

 

[chickpea]

i've talked about it with people i thought might be interested in it, had a few people take the tests, etc. but it's not something i talk about on a regular basis. my boyfriend really hates it, he'll listen to me talk about astrology but when i tried to read an enneagram description once he was offended. he doesn't like the idea of being categorized at all, and a lot of people feel this way. or just think it's boring.

i really don't take it that seriously, it's more of a mental game to me. although i guess the way they frame different ways of thinking has been useful in understanding other people's motivations. identifying myself as a Fi user, an Ne user, a 4, etc just gives a name to the ways that i can relate to someone else.

 

[Hawthorne]

I've yet to meet anyone willing to acknowledge its potential utility outside of a "scientific and empirical" basis so for the most part I keep it to myself. If someone ever expresses an interest beyond the tests, I'm sure I'll be able to shamelessly ramble about it.

 

[Mole]

Typology is a name given to MBTI under legal threat for business reasons.

So the question becomes, how do you hold MBTI?

Well I hold MBTI the same way an astronomer holds astrology, the same way a chemist holds alchemy, the same way a mathematician holds gambling, the same way the medical profession holds alternative therapy, the same way a biologist holds creationism. In fact I hold MBTI in the same way a psychometrician holds MBTI.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

And yet, without astrology, there would be no astronomy. Without no alchemy, there would be no chemistry. Without gambling (commerce), there would be no math.

I have changed my mind on Freud, though. He's interesting. The Oedipus complex is an interesting idea.

 

[á´…eparted]

MBTI is a fun way to think about people. I treat it like a toy. Fun to think about and use, can occasionally be useful, but at the end of the day there are much more important things.

I almost never think about it off the forums unless it's brought up.

 

[fetus]

I used to be pretty vocal about my interest, but then I got embarrassed with how interested I was. So I took a break for awhile, then I started getting back into it about the time I joined this site. My typology interest is honestly a deep secret of mine. I don't know why I feel that way about it, but I do. It's really weird. When people talk about it, I pretend that I don't know much about it. But usually that's because I'm in groups or something. If, in a one-on-one situation, somebody told me they were super into it, I would be delighted to discuss it.

I secretly type everyone I know ( [MENTION=24524]Luke O[/MENTION] had it right guessing this awhile ago). It's a fun thing to play around with in my mind. But I don't put too much stock in it, really. Not something that would ever influence any decision I'd make. Just a side hobby/dirty little secret.

 

[Mole]

And yet, without astrology, there would be no astronomy. Without no alchemy, there would be no chemistry. Without gambling (commerce), there would be no math.

This is true, yet astronomy shows that astrology is factually wrong and a mere superstition, and chemistry shows alchemy was mistaken and a also a superstition, and mathematics shows that there is no such thing as luck in gambling and is another superstition. And biology shows that creationism is simply wrong and is another superstition. And psychometrics shows MBTI is not a reliable or valid personality test and is yet another superstition.

So the only interesting question is, why are we so superstitious in the 21st Century?

 

[Hawthorne]

So the only interesting question is, why are we so superstitious in the 21st Century?

Something something Man and His Symbols something something human fascination with the arcane and unknown something something.

 

[BadOctopus]

I find it very interesting, and I like learning about the different ways that people think, but I don't subscribe to it as a way of predicting human behavior. Also, I think humans are too complex to be pigeonholed into just sixteen types. I know too many people who don't fit just one type description -- including myself. I think people lead with different preferences, but that's all they are. People of any type can learn to develop any function. Some functions just come more naturally than others.

And I would never use typology to favor or discriminate against someone. People aren't their types.

 

[Kanra Jest]

I don't fully fit any description so it seems obvious that while some people may fit comfortably, other people may not. Let alone how the tests even get confused about me. I still find it a fun and useful tool to get a better understanding of people. No perfect understanding is possible, but it has relevance I believe. It is not just bunk, but nor is it without flaws. It's another step to better understanding how the mind works. Just that the system can be a bit too pigeonholed.

But there are varying types of people that are remarkably similar to one another, in the way they think and this mostly reflects in their act too as a result. Of which I find fascinating, how coincidental it is.

Nonetheless. I find it fascinating and I prefer to categorize things to efficient systems of understanding, anyway. There should be some level of understanding.

 

[senza tema]

It's an entertaining brain worm that's occasionally insightful but then the feeling fades.

I like it because it's put me in touch with some people I like very, very much.

 

[Patrick]

This is true, yet astronomy shows that astrology is factually wrong and a mere superstition, and chemistry shows alchemy was mistaken and a also a superstition, and mathematics shows that there is no such thing as luck in gambling and is another superstition. And biology shows that creationism is simply wrong and is another superstition. And psychometrics shows MBTI is not a reliable or valid personality test and is yet another superstition.

So the only interesting question is, why are we so superstitious in the 21st Century?

That's the only interesting question?

A more interesting question to me is, where do we draw the line between superstition and higher levels of reality as yet untouched by slow-paced science?

Extremely skeptical materialists, I suppose, simply reject all that lacks a solid empirical basis. I don't think I could ever possibly be so skeptical or materialistic. I'm pretty skeptical, but I'm still very curious about the psychic and spiritual dimensions of life, and I'm betting they're as real as anything.

 

[Kanra Jest]

That's the only interesting question?

A more interesting question to me is, where do we draw the line between superstition and higher levels of reality as yet untouched by slow-paced science?

Extremely skeptical materialists, I suppose, simply reject all that lacks a solid empirical basis. I don't think I could ever possibly be so skeptical or materialistic. I'm pretty skeptical, but I'm still very curious about the psychic and spiritual dimensions of life, and I'm betting they're as real as anything.

An insightful perspective.

 

[indra]

For a lot of people it's like giving a micrometer to a caveman.

 

[Kingu Kurimuzon]

I use it as a supplemental tool to help understand myself and others, but I try to be cautious not to use it as a way of over-categorizing everyone I meet. When I meet someone new, I try to understand them first as a human before I consider their type. When we start associating specific behaviors and actions with specific types (i.e. "you must be ____ because you like/do ____"), then we are doing a disservice to them and ourselves as well as making the typology systems all the less credible in the eyes of those who might already view it with great skepticism. Typological stereotyping begins to look dangerously similar to racial stereotyping at a certain point.

 

[Sunny Ghost]

For me it's a helpful tool to understand the differences between myself and others.

Also, I secretly type most people that I meet and interact with.

I never understood why some liken it to astrology. Could anyone explain?

I do share my interest in MBTI with some. Some become interested. Others seem disinterested. Only one friend has gotten into it (almost) as much as I have.

 

[Kingu Kurimuzon]

I never understood why some liken it to astrology.

Also, some people take astrology more seriously than Jungian typology. I don't understand this.

Let me read a generic paragraph in the daily paper and base my life decisions on it, even though it could easily apply to any astrological sign.

 

[Poki]

I do this naturally as i always learn and understand. I just have never organized it into categories and groups nor do I try to fit people into specific buckets. It's just something that happens in a background process, not something I actively try to do. As you learn to understand people you will recognize patterns, and commonalities. Most people use simple groups like man/woman etc., but there is such a wide disparity in that I can't really use it other then...typical or average which isn't really a good indicator and is more action based and social norm based then personality.

Typology simply gives me the categories to categorize what I see naturally. It's just like someone handed my buckets to organize things into that we're just laying around in piles unlabeled. My natural process is still noticing patterns, but I don't name them eventually they make it into labeled buckets.

 

[Poki]

Also, some people take astrology more seriously than Jungian typology. I don't understand this.

Let me read a generic paragraph in the daily paper and base my life decisions on it, even though it could easily apply to any astrological sign.

Lmao...yeah and then it comes true because of actions when its only true because it pushed you to do it. It wouldn't have naturally happened.

On a side note it is crazy how much I match being a Leo, Monkey (Chinese zodiac) and everything else. Most nail who I am more accurate then most typology descriptions on a whole. I think alot of issues with typology is being able to differentiate objective data and subjective data when typing.